In addressing a golf ball supported on a tee a golf club will momentarily deform the ball, compressing the ball in the direction of golf club movement. As a golf ball is deformed by the impact with a golf club, the ball expands in the direction of the tee and a significant amount of energy is expended in increased drag. Because of the speed of the golf club head, the tee is not normally displaced into the soil but is, instead, compressed. Additional energy is lost for purposes of golf ball flight if ball deformation creates a suction between the golf ball and the cup-like seat of a golf tee.
Prior art patents have addressed the problem of golf tees impeding the initial acceleration of a ball. U.S. Pat. No. 3,575,420 to Turner discloses a plastic golf tee which is hinged so that the tee will pivot in a forward direction when a ball is struck by a club. U.S. Pat. No. 2,011,203 to Seiki teaches use of a hollow tee member made of a light weight material such as paper, cardboard or fiber. Because the tee member is made of a light weight material, drag is reduced. The tee member of Seiki is inserted into the ground by a plug which is removed prior to resting a ball on the tee member. U.S. Pat. No. 4,192,504 to Clugage discloses a golf tee having a fin on a curved stem and having a rib formed in the ball-supporting socket. The purpose of the fin is to facilitate alignment and the purpose of the rib is to eliminate the suction between a ball and a tee. Such extreme departures from the construction of conventional golf tees lead to difficulty in gaining sanctioning by the rules committees of major golf associations.
U.S. Pat. No. 2,455,705 to Seager is concerned with the suction between a golf ball and a tee. The golf tee of Seager includes a plurality of narrow ribs at the ball-supporting area of the tee. While the Seager tee is more in keeping with conventional golf tees than are the above-described inventions, the narrow ribs only slightly resemble the cupped surface of the conventional golf tee. The same is true of U.S. Pat. Nos. 1,638,527; 1,644,979; 1,644,980 and 1,658,226, all to Clausing.
The prior art does indeed increase the ratio of kinetic energy of the ball in flight to kinetic energy of the golf club upon contact with the ball. The above-described patents increase the ratio, however, by focusing on reducing frictional or static energy lost at the tee. It is an object of the present invention to provide a golf tee which closely resembles a conventional golf tee but which minimizes both static and dynamic energy lost to the tee.